« PreviousContinue »
and the defendant's witnesses reside at the latter place; as the . affidavit should have stated the nature of the defence to the action. Ladbury v. Richards, E. 3 G 4.
Page 82 3. Where the cause of action is tran
sitory, the plaintiff has his election to lay his renue in any county :Where, therefore, on a motion by the defendant to change it from London to Lincolnshire, on an allidavit, which stated that the action was brought to dispute a bankruptcy, and that the plaintiff, and all the witnesses necessary to prove it, resided in the latter county; the Court discharged the rule, on the plaintiff's swearing that several of his witnesses resided in London. Jenkins v. Hutton, H. 3 & 4 G. 4.
520 4. A defendant cannot change the
venue from London to Exeter, after an order for time to plead, on the terms of pleading issually and taking short notice of trial for the adjourneil London Sittings after Term, unless under special circumstances; although the application for that purpose was made in an issuable Term.
Nunn v. Taylor, H. 3 & 4 G. 4. 598
parish, which should be vestrymen and not feoffees, in a vestry to be held by them; and a power of reinoval of the school-master was given, so that it was with the consent and agreement of the feoffees and vestrymen, or the more part of them, wbich should be assembled in vestry, so always as there should be ten at least of the vestrymen which were not feoffees, vote at the holding of the vestry in which the putting away of any school-master should be agreed upon :-Held, that in the execution of the power of removal of the master, the votes were to be taken per capita, and not according to the provisions of the statute 58 Geo. 3, c. 59, “ an act for the regulation of parish vestries." At. torney - General v. Wilkinson, T. 3 G. 4.
WAR OFFICE. See OFFICERS.
LIMITATION OF Actions,1.
VESTRY. Where under a deed of feoffment,
certain lands were granted to fourteen feoffees for the maintenance of a school-master to instruct the children of all the inhabitants of a parish, and it was provided that no act concerning the lands should be done but in a vestry, or meeting of the feoffees, and ten at least of the inhabitants of the
WARRANT OF ATTORNEY.
RECOVERY, 2. where a rule nisi had been obtained
for setting aside a warrant of attorney, and judgment which had been entered up thereon, on an affidavit by the grantor, that it had been given to secure a loan which was grossly usurious, and which affidavit was completely answered by the grantee ; the Court refused to direct an issue, and dis
charged the rule with costs. Cole v. Gill, M.3 G. 4. Puge 353
Sce Power, 2. Wherc a farm was demised to A.
and B. jointly, and A. by agreement underlet part of it to C., and gave receipts for payment of rent, and a notice to quit, in his name alone :- Held, that 1. and B. could not maintain a joint action against C. for pulling down a shed which stood on part of the premises demised. Steele v. Western, E. 3 G. 4.
afterwards discovered that he was a Jew, and had been sworn by a false name ;-Held, that any objection as to his testimony was too late after verdict; and that the oath, as taken by the witness, was binding on him, as it would subject him to the penalties of perjury if he had sworn falsely.
Sells v. Houre, E. 3 G.4. Page 36 2. Where foreign witnesses appear
See VARIANCE, 4.
WAY, RIGHT OF.
to be domiciled in this country, they are not entitled to the expenses of their return home: and it seems that a witness is not enti. titled to his costs, unless they have been paid him previously to taxation :-Held also, that a broker, suhpænaed to attend at a trial, is not entitled to compensation for loss of time. Lopes v. De Tastet, E. 3 G. 4.
120 3. Where a person forged the name
of his co-trustee to a power of attorney for the sale of stock standing in their joint names, in the books of the Company of the Bank of England, and the forgery being discovered, the stock was not sold; -Held, on an indictment for for. gery, that such co-trustee was a competent witness to prove that the signature of his name to the power was a forgery. The King v. Wait, H. 3 & 4 Ĝ. 4. 473
See PRACTICE, 4.
See Devise, 1.
VENUE, 2, 3.
the Gospels at the trial, and it was
WORK AND LABOUR.
See Assumpsit, 2.
WRIT OF INQUIRY.
END OF THE SEVENTH VOLUME.
w. Pople, Printer,